Tuesday, December 31, 2013

The latest Pew Research poll confirms, as has always been true in America, that most people do not believe that mankind evolved from lower life forms through natural processes as an accident over time. In fact, public opinion is evolving AWAY from such atheistic propaganda in the 21st century, except among liberals (who will believe anything??).

This Pew poll shows that only 32% of Americans believe that evolution is “due to natural processes such as natural selection.”

The Pew Research Religion & Public Life Project report released Monday found that 33% think "humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time." . . . [and another] 24% of adults say "a supreme being guided the evolution of living things."

Among white evangelical Protestants, 64% say that humans have existed in their present form since the beginning of time. The survey found that half of black Protestants responded the same way. Whereas 78% of white mainline Protestants say that humans and other living things have evolved over time.

Seventy-six percent of the religiously unaffiliated, 68% of white non-Hispanic Catholics and 53% of Hispanic Catholics agreed with evolution.

Those saying that humans have evolved over time also were asked for their views on the processes responsible for evolution. Roughly a quarter of adults (24%) say that “a supreme being guided the evolution of living things for the purpose of creating humans and other life in the form it exists today,” while about a third (32%) say that evolution is “due to natural processes such as natural selection.”

. . . while fully 78% of white mainline Protestants say that humans and other living things have evolved over time, the group is divided over whether evolution is due to natural processes or whether it was guided by a supreme being (36% each). White non-Hispanic Catholics also are divided equally on the question (33% each). The religiously unaffiliated predominantly hold the view that evolution stems from natural processes (57%), while 13% of this group says evolution was guided by a supreme being. Of the white evangelical Protestants and black Protestants who believe that humans have evolved over time, most believe that a supreme being guided evolution.

. . . Younger adults are more likely than older generations to believe that living things have evolved over time. And those with more years of formal schooling are more likely than those with less education to say that humans and animals have evolved over time.

A poll out Monday shows that less than half – 43 percent – of those who identify with the Republican Party say they believe humans have evolved over time [either by accident or by God's hand], plunging from 54 percent four years ago. Forty-eight percent say they believe “humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time,” up from 39 percent in 2009.

At 67 percent and 65 percent, respectively, the numbers of Democrats and independents who believe in evolution have remained more or less the same since 2009. . . .

The gaping partisan disparity remains, the analysis states, even when accounting for “differences in the racial and ethnic composition of Democrats and Republicans or differences in their levels of religious commitment.” But the dip from 2009 is a telling indicator of the growing influence in the GOP of the oft-yoked tea party-type ideologues and the “religious right.”

[It's now] a 24-point gap between the parties — and an increase from the 10-point difference the poll found in 2009, and the 13-point difference found in 2005.

According to one of the pollsters, the results were a bit of a surprise. CNN quotes her saying: "I didn't expect to see that kind of shift. I think it basically fits with a pattern of growing polarization. And we see that on some other science issues."

The poll also found that of those who believed in evolution, about a quarter said they also believed it was caused by a creator. Meaning they believed a supreme being set the wheels of evolution in motion at some point in the past.

Interestingly, differences weren't just found when comparing political affiliations. Gender also played a role, with men 10 percent more likely to believe in evolution than women.

Monday, December 30, 2013

After the announcement that hairdressers Danny Leclair, 45, and Aubrey Loots, 42, would perform in a "gay wedding" on the AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF) float in Pasadena's annual Tournament of Roses Parade, Christians nationwide plan to boycott the event.

"Gay marriage is illegal in over 30 states, why would they promote something that is blatantly illegal? That's just stupid."-- Karen Grube of San Diego

[Karen] Grube told the Pasadena Star-News the Tournament of Roses should not get involved in a "political agenda." She called on the organization to remove the AHF float from the parade and urged corporate sponsors to pull their support for the parade if Leclair and Loots get married along the parade route.

AHF spokesman Ged Kenslea said the organization believes "sanctified relationships, like gay marriage, which is legal in California and 16 other states, will really go a long way to help reduce the spread of HIV and other STDs."

The AIDS Healthcare Foundation’s float, “Living the Dream: Love Is the Best Protection,” was created to celebrate victories in 2013 for gay marriage advocates, including Supreme Court decisions upholding the repeal of California’s Proposition 8 and striking down a key part of the Defense of Marriage Act.

The Pasadena Tournament of Roses has received complaints from people opposing the wedding. Some took to the organization’s Facebook page to voice their anger.

[Many have] expressed concern about the event not being suited for families that may tune in to watch the annual New Year’s Day celebration. The popular float parade is watched by people around the world.

In a statement released to the Los Angeles Times, the Pasadena Tournament of Roses said it is “pleased” to have the [AHF] foundation participate in this year’s event.

Sunday, December 29, 2013

Even liberal media sources would admit, although rarely report, that America is turning against abortion in favor of life at a record pace, as an all-time high of 87 abortion clinics closed in 2013.

“These numbers show that the pro-life movement is gaining ground and that the abortion industry is collapsing – mostly due to its own negligence and greed, which has been exposed by their unwillingness and inability to comply with even the most rudimentary safety standards.”-- Troy Newman, president of Operation Rescue.

In state after state, but most notably Texas, anti-abortion legislators passed a series of laws designed to make legal abortion care seem incredibly dangerous for women (it's actually very safe and much safer than continuing a pregnancy) and therefore requiring extensive regulations that just happen to be out of the reach of most clinics, forcing them to close down. One popular new regulation is requiring abortion clinics to meet ambulatory surgical standards that cost clinics millions of dollars to satisfy . . . Another is forcing doctors to have hospital admitting privileges to perform abortions. Problem is that many abortion doctors can't get them . . .

The faux concern for women's health, unfortunately, looks like an effective strategy so far. Since 2011, 73 abortion clinics have closed or stopped performing abortion, and roughly half of the closures are due to the new regulations. A big chunk of the clinics are in Texas, where a court battle to block the hospital admitting privileges regulation was lost, forcing at least a dozen clinics to stop performing abortion.

The total number of surgical abortion clinics left in the U.S. is now 582. This represents an impressive 12% net decrease in surgical abortion clinics in 2013 alone, and a 73% drop from a high in 1991 of 2,176.

Of 87 clinics that discontinued surgical abortions, 81 are permanently shuttered while 6 abortion businesses ceased surgical abortions, but continued to sell that abortion pill. The figures do not include the 11 abortion clinics that were closed temporarily in 2013, then reopened later in the year.

. . . In November, the Centers for Disease Control released its latest abortion figures that showed a 3% decrease in abortion numbers in 2010. This decrease is in keeping with a 20 year abortion trend.

While national abortion numbers are three years behind, some states have more recent abortion numbers that confirm that additional oversight and watchdog efforts by pro-life groups close abortion clinics and save lives.

At least a dozen clinics in Texas have closed their doors or stopped offering the procedure in the past month after a federal appeals court and the U.S. Supreme Court let the new statute take effect. The Texas law is emblematic of a shift in the tactics of abortion opponents: State-level laws targeting women and providers have become a more effective tool than the past noisy clinic blockades and violence against doctors. Since 2011, legislatures in 30 mostly Republican-controlled states have passed 203 abortion restrictions, about as many as in all of the prior decade. At least 73 clinics have closed or stopped performing abortions. New laws are responsible for roughly half of the closures, while declining demand, industry consolidation, and crackdowns on unfit providers have also contributed to the drop.

In 1992 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled states could pass restrictions that don’t present an “undue burden” to women seeking abortions, made legal in all 50 states by the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision.

Saturday, December 28, 2013

This week, the Bagley, Minnesota school district agreed that their action in October of forbidding an Egyptian-born, American Christian pastor from speaking in the school auditorium during non-school hours violated his right of free speech, and that of local taxpayers who organized the event. The school, bowing to pressure from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-MN) because the pastor planned to present evidence of Muslim violence against Christians, cancelled his speaking engagement.

"We asked to change the venue to the [Calvary Evangelical Free Church] because the speaker did not appear to coincide with school district policy."-- Steve Cairns, Superintendent of Bagley Public Schools, said in October.

Originally slated to speak at the Bagley High School Sunday through Tuesday, [Usama] Dakdok’s location was shifted to the church. The school had received calls from people who disagreed with Dakdok’s anti-Islamic message.

Dakdok spoke at the Calvary Evangelical Free Church on Sunday and Monday before a full house, according to a representative of the church, with approximately a dozen protesters outside [decrying the message of Dakdok]. Pastor Rick Moore could not be reached for comment.

Dakdok describes himself as an Egyptian born Christian who was taught Islam in a government school in Egypt. He came to the United States in 1992 and has since been preaching his ministry in effort to, "reach out to the Muslim people with the word of Jesus Christ."

About a dozen individuals showed up on Sunday to protest Dakdok, the director of Straight Road Ministries, an organization seeking to convert Muslims to Christianity and "expose the lies of the enemy who is seeking to keep people away from the truth of salvation in Christ." Despite the presence of protesters, the audience was full for both Dakdok's Sunday and Monday sessions.

According to his website, Dakdok converted to Christianity as an 11-year-old and came to the United States in 1992. He holds a Master's Degree in Missiology from New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary and founded The Straight Way in 2001.

Last December, Dakdok earned the ire of the Council of American-Islamic Relations Minnesota (CAIR-MN) in a talk titled, "The Truth about Islam," where he claimed that an Islamic revival in the country would lead Muslims to "start beheading your children and your grandchildren."

Dakdok also claimed that Muslims in America would "kill your children for not eating what is liked. For not eating the lawful foods" and alleged that for Msulims "killing you is a small matter."

Usama Dakdok was subjected to unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination by the Bagley Independent School. Dakdok was invited by residents of the small, northern city to share his story of growing up in Egypt, attending government schools, and witnessing the persecution of other Coptic Christians by fundamentalist Muslims.

A local Bagley resident rented the auditorium for the dates of October 27-29, 2013. The school district revoked the use of the facility four days before the event after the local Council on American Islamic Relations (“CAIR”) affiliate created controversy.

After receiving Liberty Counsel’s letter, Bagley School District reversed the decision and confirmed that Mr. Dakdok may return to hold the event [sometime in the future].

“Usama Dakdok is a Christian originally from Egypt, who grew up in that country attending government schools where he was educated about Islam as the state religion. In Egypt, as a member of the Coptic ethnic minority, Mr. Dakdok has also personally witnessed the persecution of other Coptic Christians by fundamentalist Muslims. As you may be aware in Egypt (as elsewhere), the Quran is explicitly cited as justification for the burning of churches, raping of women, murder of both sexes and all ages through beheading and other methods, forced ‘marriage’ of Christian women and girls to Muslim men and their forcible ‘conversion’ to Islam, payment of the ‘jizya’ tax for the privilege of remaining Christian,and other persecution that is inflicted upon members of the Coptic Christian ethnic and religious minority,” Liberty Counsel told the district.

So he is “uniquely qualified to give a Christian perspective about life under shariah (Islamic religious) law, and is a sought-after public speaker.”

Regarding his appearance in Minnesota, he had been invited by residents of the community to speak. A local resident, Tammy Godwin, made arrangements to use the school.

The national CAIR organization was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding trial, and a review of the public record, including federal criminal court documents, past IRS 990 tax records and Federal Election Commission records detailing donor occupations, reveals that CAIR has been associated with a disturbing number of convicted terrorists or felons in terrorism probes, as well as suspected terrorists and active targets of terrorism investigations.

Friday, December 27, 2013

A Christian school was turned away at Charlie Norwood VA Medical Center in Augusta, Georgia from their annual Christmas caroling -- an anti-Christian trend in President Obama's Pentagon and Veterans Administration. The group was told that they couldn't sing anything alluding to Christianity, so they just left.

“From our point of view, the purpose of Christmas and its carols is to celebrate and honor the birth of Jesus, and if that goal is taken from us, it is an issue we do not want to be a part of. We do not think it is a good idea to systemically weed out religious Christmas songs from being sung in certain places.”-- Dan Funsch, Principal, Alleluia Community School

The students from Augusta's Alleluia Community School were prevented from singing traditional holiday songs such as "Silent Night" and "O Come All Ye Faithful."

Hospital spokesman Brian Rothwell said in a statement that military service members represent people of all faiths. He said that VA rules on "spiritual care" are in place out of respect for every faith.

Alleluia Community School Principal Dan Funsch said he was sad to hear that the Veterans Affairs hospital’s “spiritual care” grants holiday exemption only to Frosty, Rudolph and the secular characters that make up the 12 Days of Christmas.

. . . Funsch said, when he and his students arrived at the hospital Friday, they were handed a list of 12 Christmas songs the hospital’s Pastoral Service had “deemed appropriate for celebration within the hearing range of all Veterans.”

[Hospital spokesman Brian] Rothwell could not provide the date the VA’s ban on religious Christmas songs took effect, but Funsch said that in 2011 and 2012 his students were welcomed without hesitation at the Augusta VA’s Uptown campus as part of a yearly caroling the school does on its last day of classes before the holiday break.

We don’t know the precise religious makeup of the local VA’s patient population. But we would guess that the hospital’s complaint box isn’t stuffed with indignant comments from patients who don’t want to hear Christmas songs. The Alleluia group reported no problems when it caroled at the VA’s Uptown campus in 2011 and 2012.

. . . do veterans really have to be protected from certain holiday singing? Caroling scarcely qualifies as imposing religious persecution. For a sense of perspective, read recent news stories about the bloody, violent purge of Christianity in other parts of the world. On Christmas Day, 15 Christians died in a church bombing in Baghdad, Iraq, where Christianity has been practiced since the first century A.D.

It appears that the VA is trying to outlaw being offended. But after word of the Augusta caroling decision hit national news wires this week, the hospital inadvertently cast a wider net to offend many more people.

Thursday, December 26, 2013

Because data from the government Centers for Disease Control (CDC) show that homosexual men are the least healthy demographic in America (because anal sex is the main cause of the spread of HIV/AIDS), President Obama is focusing advertising campaigns to recruit homosexuals to sign up for ObamaCare in order to redistribute gay health care expenses to healthy Americans.

Washington’s new health insurance exchange dispatched a sign-up envoy to one of the city’s gay clubs one recent night to get out the word about Obamacare. It envisioned men mingling on the dance floor, a cocktail in one hand and enrollment information in the other.

Add an appearance by Santa wearing a “Naughty” hat as he posed for pictures on stage, and DC Health Link assister John Esposito had a near-impossible task that night. Positioned behind the stage and bar area, he stood by a small table offering not just information about insurance enrollment but packages of condoms and tubes of lubricant. The latter items were courtesy of the Whitman-Walker Clinic, which also had its HIV testing van parked outside.

[Esposito] by day is stationed at Whitman-Walker as part of the DC exchange’s ongoing work with the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community.

Tailoring outreach to targeted populations makes sense, of course, and nightclubs are a logical location for Washington’s LGBT community. Gays and lesbians represent a significant percentage of the 42,000 people who are uninsured in the District. Most are African-American and live in four wards where the uninsurance rate averages about 18 percent, far higher than the rest of the city.

The White House has stressed that gays and lesbians are more likely than other groups to be uninsured nationwide. The administration has been working with LGBT groups and on Tuesday released an infographic on ways the Affordable Care Act benefits them, including coverage for same-sex spouses and coverage of preexisting conditions including HIV/AIDS.

. . . The Affordable Care Act has the potential to transform the lives of countless LGBT people and improve the health and well-being of our community – for generations to come.

. . . That’s why we have been working closely with organizations like Out2Enroll [see video below], CenterLink, the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association, PFLAG, the Equality Federation, and the Gay and Lesbian Victory Institute over the last few months to raise awareness of the Affordable Care Act. And we’ve also been working with LGBT community centers, Pride organizations, philanthropic foundations, LGBT health centers, and HIV/AIDS service providers to empower local LGBT communities with the information and resources they need to get access to quality, affordable health care.

Plans purchased through the Marketplace can’t discriminate based on sexual orientation or gender identity;

You can’t be charged a higher premium just because you’re lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender;

No denial of coverage because of pre-existing conditions like HIV/AIDS, cancer, or mental health diagnoses;

Legally married same-sex couples are treated equally for same-sex couples are treated equally for financial assistance when purchasing coverage in the Health Insurance Marketplace, regardless of where they live;

No more lifetime limits on coverage for people with chronic diseases like HIV/AIDS.

Log Cabin Republicans, which represents gay conservatives and allies, is targeting an ad posted on YouTube last week by Out2Enroll, a coalition of organizations working to make sure access to affordable, comprehensive health insurance reaches LBGT communities.

[Log Cabin Executive Director Gregory T.] Angelo said the ad is an example of the left “promoting harmful stereotypes that gay men are nothing more than sex-crazed lechers.”

“If anyone on the right made such a comparison, liberals would be apoplectic,” Angelo added.

“At a time when left-wing propagandists are decrying Duck Dynasty‘s Phil Robertson for equating homosexuality with promiscuity and deviance, Out2Enroll and others should take a look in the mirror and ask if the truth is that they are the ones responsible for promoting such harmful stereotypes,” he said.

Tuesday, December 24, 2013

Gay Agenda judges across America are rapidly falling in line to forbid American voters the right to define marriage as between one man and one woman. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, a devout Roman Catholic, has warned for more than a decade that judicial activism in the high court decisions were pointing toward an eventual stripping of moral values from the fabric that created America.

[Justice Antonin Scalia's] prediction came true on Friday, when U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby ruled that Utah's 2004 ban on gay marriage was unconstitutional. And Shelby even made note of Scalia's dissent at points in his ruling, citing it as part of his reasoning in striking down the Utah law.

Scalia warned that the Supreme Court's reasoning that struck down [one portion of] the Defense of Marriage Act — which denied federal benefits to same-sex couples — could be used to strike down state laws banning same-sex marriage. Scalia, who's notoriously anti-gay marriage, was saying this was a bad thing. In an interesting twist, Utah's Judge Shelby quoted Scalia's negative prophecy in his pro-gay marriage opinion [and] then wrote that he "agreed" with that part of Scalia's opinion, and offered his response. Though Scalia meant it as some kind of dire warning, Shelby cited the Supreme Court's decision as a reason to overturn Utah's law:

The court agrees with Justice Scalia’s interpretation of Windsor and finds that the important federalism concerns at issue here are nevertheless insufficient to save a state-law prohibition that denies the Plaintiffs their rights to due process and equal protection under the law.

The scenarios must have sounded all too familiar to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. In June, when the court issued a landmark decision ordering the federal government to recognize same-sex marriages performed in states where they were legal, Scalia warned of what could come next.

"How easy it is, indeed how inevitable, to reach the same conclusion with regard to state laws denying same-sex couples marital status," Scalia wrote in a scathing dissent in United States vs. Windsor, which struck down part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act but left state laws intact. "No one should be fooled; it is just a matter of listening and waiting for the other shoe" to drop.

Now, for opponents of same-sex marriage, the other shoe is dropping.

"Now it is just as Justice Scalia predicted," [U.S. District Judge Timothy S.] Black wrote in his Ohio ruling. "The lower courts are applying the Supreme Court's decision, as they must, and the question is presented whether a state can do what the federal government cannot — i.e., discriminate against same-sex couples. ... Under the Constitution of the United States, the answer is no."

[Numerous] judges have overridden legislators and voters who had approved the bans before national popular opinion began to tilt in favor of same-sex marriage.

The same-sex weddings began in a joyful chaos on Friday afternoon after Judge Shelby declared that the ban that Utah voters approved in 2004 violated the United States Constitution. While many gay-rights advocates expected a favorable ruling from Judge Shelby, an appointee of President Obama, the timing caught many gay couples off-guard. . . .

Gov. Gary R. Herbert, a Republican, said the flurry of new marriages and unresolved legal questions — lawyers on both sides said the case was likely to reach the United States Supreme Court — had created “a lot of chaos” in Utah. He condemned the ruling as an activist judge’s attack on a definition of traditional marriage that was supported by a wide majority of Utah residents.

. . . A spokeswoman for Ohio’s attorney general, Mike DeWine, said he would appeal the [Ohio] ruling to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.

The Ohio decision did not go as far as the ruling in Utah, but experts said both were among federal cases around the country likely to return the issue of same-sex marriage to the Supreme Court.

. . . The Mormon Church, once a leader of the anti-marriage-equality fight and a major force in Utah, was practically apologetic in its disagreement with the decision. “The Church has been consistent in its support of traditional marriage while teaching that all people should be treated with respect,” the Church statement said. “This ruling by a district court will work its way through the judicial process.” A few dead-enders in Utah have fought back, and there is no guarantee that the decision will survive on appeal, but the muted response suggests that everyone, on all sides of the issue, sees where the country is headed.

Dominoes are falling all over. The day before Utah became the eighteenth state (in addition to the District of Columbia) to allow same-sex marriage, New Mexico became No. 17. The New Mexico Supreme Court ruled unanimously that its state constitution required marriage equality.

. . . The Ohio [Judge Black] decision is crucial because people in the United States tend to move from state to state. . . . It would be a disorderly mess to have separate spheres of law [from state to state] for gay married couples and straight married couples . . .

What [Utah's Judge] Shelby and all these judges are seeing is that it is impossible to offer gay people some rights and not others. . . .

“The alleged right to same-sex marriage that the State claims the Plaintiffs are seeking is simply the same right that is currently enjoyed by heterosexual individuals: the right to make a public commitment to form an exclusive relationship and create a family with a partner with whom the person shares an intimate and sustaining emotional bond,” wrote [Judge Shelby].

“This right is deeply rooted in the nation’s history and implicit in the concept of ordered liberty because it protects an individual’s ability to make deeply personal choices about love and family free from government interference,” he declared. “And, as discussed above, this right is enjoyed by all individuals. If the right to same-sex marriage were a new right, then it should make new protections and benefits available to all citizens. But heterosexual individuals are as likely to exercise their purported right to same-sex marriage as gay men and lesbians are to exercise their purported right to opposite-sex marriage. Both same-sex and opposite-sex marriage are therefore simply manifestations of one right—the right to marry—applied to people with different sexual identities.”

“The Plaintiffs are seeking access to an existing right, not the declaration of a new right,” said the judge.

The judge argued that the Fifth Amendment, ratified in 1791, and the Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, are the two provisions of the Constitution that have guaranteed the “existing right” of a man to marry another man or a woman to marry another woman.

In a broadly written ruling Monday, Judge Timothy Black said Ohio's ["Gay Marriage"] ban is unconstitutional and that states cannot discriminate against same-sex couples simply because some voters don't like homosexuality.

Bridget Coontz, the attorney who argued on behalf of the state, said Wednesday in Black's Cincinnati courtroom that in the Supreme Court's historic June decision, the justices also found that states have the right to decide for themselves whether to recognize gay marriage, and Ohio voters decided not to in 2004.

"Ohio doesn't want Delaware or Maryland to define who is married under Ohio law," she said. "To allow that to happen would allow one state to set the marriage policy for all others."

Black said constitutional rights trump Ohio's gay marriage ban, questioning whether it was passed for a legitimate state interest "other than simply maintaining a 'traditional' definition of marriage."

It is not surprising that judges might want to quote a conservative justice when striking down what voters have put in place. Ohio and Utah voters amended their state constitutions to ban same-sex marriages in 2004, along with other states. Black and Shelby were nominated by President Obama.

Shelby, 43, does not have the reputation as a firebrand. He had been on the bench only six months when he was assigned the same-sex marriage case Kitchen v. Herbert. He was previously a Salt Lake City lawyer and was honored for his service in Operation Desert Storm while in the Utah National Guard.

The state of Utah has said it will ask the Supreme Court to stay Shelby’s ruling and stop same-sex marriages while an appeals court considers the merits of the decision. . . .

Monday, December 23, 2013

On Christmas Eve in 1968, all three astronauts aboard America's Apollo 8 spacecraft broadcast to the world the biblical account of God's creation of the earth by reading from Genesis. Just hours earlier, God provided these men a glimpse of the earth never before witnessed by mankind. This week, NASA released a brief documentary video of "Earthrise" on this 45th anniversary of the event -- absent God and the Bible.

"Oh my God, look at that picture over there! There's the Earth comin' up. Wow, is that pretty!"-- Astronaut William Anders

The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork. [Psalm 19:1 ESV]For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made.[Romans 1:19-20a ESV]

In addition to being the first humans to orbit the moon, the website nasa.gov cited the primary mission was capturing "high-resolution photographs of proposed Apollo landing areas." The first manned lunar landing, Apollo 11, would take place just seven months later.

Among the mission's firsts, according to nasa.gov, are the "first pictures taken by humans of the Earth from deep space, and first live TV coverage of the lunar surface." According to [author of "Genesis," Robert] Zimmerman, Anders also captured a color image of an event never before seen firsthand by man. As the crew flew 70 miles above the moon, Anders grabbed the camera and took the photograph known as "Earthrise."

The U.S. Postal Service would issue the photograph on a six-cent stamp with the words, "In the beginning " The phrase paid homage to the Christmas Eve TV broadcast of the crew reading from the biblical Genesis. Zimmerman wrote that a reporter put the idea of a "Christmas-type gesture from space" into Borman's head.

. . . Frustrated over the lack of a poetic idea to commemorate the birth of Jesus Christ, Borman turned to a friend who called a spokesman for the Bureau of the Budget, Joe Laitin. Zimmerman said Laitin, a reporter who covered the Nuremberg Trials, "got a Gideon Bible that he had once swiped from a hotel." Laitin's wife told him: "If you want poetry you should look in the Old Testament." When Laitin responded he wouldn't know where to begin, Christine Laitin said, "Why don't you begin at the beginning?"

"For all the people on Earth the crew of Apollo 8 has a message we would like to send you".

"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.
And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness."

Jim Lovell:

"And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day."

Frank Borman:

"And God said, Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good."

Borman then added, "And from the crew of Apollo 8, we close with good night, good luck, a Merry Christmas, and God bless all of you - all of you on the good Earth."

Millions tuned in on Dec. 24, 1968, when Frank Borman, Bill Anders and Lovell circled the moon. A television camera on board took footage of the crater-filled surface as the astronauts read Bible verses describing the creation of Earth. They circled 10 times and began reading from the Book of Genesis on the last orbit.

"It's a foundation of Christianity, Judaism and Islam," Lovell said of choosing Genesis. "It is the foundation of most of the world's religions. ... They all had that basis of the Old Testament."

After the Christmastime broadcast, atheist leader Madalyn Murray O'Hair filed a lawsuit against NASA, alleging First Amendment violations. But the case was dismissed, and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal.

Sunday, December 22, 2013

Judge Timothy DeGiusti, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma, issued an injunction against the Obama Administration by ruling protection for nearly 200 evangelical ministries from federal mandates requiring them to provide abortifacients and contraceptives, as well as sterilizations, to their workers.

Under the ruling, 187 non-exempt religious groups that offer insurance through GuideStone Financial Resources of the Southern Baptist Convention are now exempt from the mandate while their [legal] case proceeds.

The mandate would have otherwise kicked in for the ministries on Jan. 1, forcing them to either to begin offering contraceptive coverage or face penalties.

To date, there are currently 89 lawsuits challenging the Health and Human Services (HHS) Department's mandate, according to plaintiffs in the case.

Ultimately, the matter is widely expected to be decided by the Supreme Court, which agreed last month to hear a challenge to the mandate.

In his 16-page decision, DeGiusti said the ministries have the right to challenge the health care law's contraceptive mandate and that an injunction is needed to prevent the federal government from enforcing it on them.

DeGiusti . . . said the ministries who refuse to provide the contraceptives also "face substantial financial penalties, and their refusal will cause a substantial financial loss to GuideStone if it excludes nonexempt, noncompliant organizations from the GuideStone plan."

“This is an overwhelming victory for GuideStone and the nearly 200 plaintiffs in this class-action lawsuit,” said Adele Keim, a lawyer for GuideStone and the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty -- a non-profit, public-interest law firm that helped represent the ministries in the case.

“Today’s ruling will allow hundreds of Baptist ministries to continue preaching the Gospel and serving the poor … without laboring under the threat of massive fines,” she said.

The injunction will prevent the government from enforcing the mandate as the suit makes its way through the legal system. However, the groups still must comply with all of the other ObamaCare regulations.

In the lawsuit, the ministries object to providing four out of 20 Food and Drug Administration-approved contraceptives, including the morning-after pill and the week-after pill, which they allege may cause early abortions.

Saturday, December 21, 2013

After allowing several "holiday displays" in the Florida Capitol, including a Festivus pole and a chair of spaghetti with eyeballs next to the Christmas Nativity scene, officials said "no" to an homage to Satan.

In Montana's Flathead Valley, three high schools defied threats from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) by holding their "holiday concert" at a Mormon church.

Lucien Greaves, a spokesman for the New York-based temple, said in an email on Thursday that he was "genuinely surprised" the Department of Management Services "would place itself in such a seemingly awkward position" by refusing to allow the temple's display.

However, before filing any legal challenge, Greaves said his group is giving the department a short time to clarify the offensive nature of the display and to see if some compromise could be worked out.

The state agency had recently approved two Christian nativity scenes, a pole made of empty beer cans, banners from atheists and a shredded pile of paper that is supposed resemble the deity of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

The ACLU said it has yet to hear from the temple, but it would like to hear from any group "wrongfully denied" from being able to put up a display in the rotunda.

While these performances are taking place at a religious venue, Assistant Superintendent of Kalispell Public Schools Dan Zorn said the school choirs perform at many venues all across the Flathead Valley.

Zorn said the student choirs from both Glacier and Flathead High Schools do numerous performances throughout the year, and at no time are they being partial to one group or another, nor are they teaching the students religion.

"We're not promoting religion, we're not supporting any religious belief here," Zorn said. "We're taking advantage of an opportunity for our kids to perform, regardless of the religiousity or I guess the religious underpinnings that might or might not be in place."

Dozens of student members of the Flathead, Glacier and Whitefish high school choirs performed their annual "Peace on Earth Community Christmas Celebration" at the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Kalispell Thursday. They will be performing a second time Friday evening. School officials decided to go through with the performance despite recent complaints from the ACLU and FFRF which argued the concert was an unconstitutional violation of the separation of church and state due to public school involvement with church activity.

. . . Kalispell Superintendent Darlene Schottle wrote in a formal response to the ACLU that not allowing students to voluntarily participate in the concert could also be seen as a constitutional violation of the right to freely express one's religion. "One could interpret that by denying district students the opportunity to participate because of the Christian theme of the overall event might be in violation of the second half of the establishment clause, 'prohibiting the free exercise thereof.' Students may 'opt out' of assignments and/or activities that might conflict with their belief system to assure that the district is not placing them in a situation they might find uncomfortable."

Friday, December 20, 2013

Fifth-graders at Ralph J. Osgood Intermediate School on Long Island were instructed to present holiday music including the music teacher's own unique rendition of Silent Night that omitted any reference to Jesus, Christmas, or anything relevant to the actual event being celebrated.

“Any reference to what the song was about — the birth of Christ, ’round young virgin mother and child’ — all of those things were omitted from the version that the children sang beautifully,” said Jackie McDonald, a mother who walked out of the performance.

“To choose to sing ‘Silent Night’ and eviscerate the meaning of the song was not appropriate,” McDonald told CBS 2's Carolyn Gusoff.

“It’s offensive,” one father told Gusoff. “If you’re going to remove words to not offend other religions, what about the religion that that song belongs to, which is Christianity?”